It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Aliens have not contacted us, therefore theres nothing to disclose

page: 17
30
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:30 AM
link   




posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:32 AM
link   
files.abovetopsecret.com...
Scarry
edit on 18-4-2011 by takso because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:34 AM
link   
files.abovetopsecret.com...
Sleepey
edit on 18-4-2011 by takso because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:37 AM
link   



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by andre18
 


I was reading your post but the only words that I could see plastered over everything else you were writing about were, "Nom nom, feed me! I'm eating what the gov is telling me.. nom."

You can have your opinion but the target is way over there. Take off your blindfold.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by KrypticCriminal
Yes, but your basing your facts on current scientific knowlege. In the fourties a scientist made calculations on what it would take to get to the moon with full equations and everything. The answer that he came up with was it was impossible because it would take so much fuel that the rocket would'nt get off the ground. Yet come the sixties what did we do.


The aliens could be millions of years ahead using technology very far ahead of us but it doesn't matter how for a head they they might be, millions, billions it does't matter. Any aliens 2-300 years ahead of us are already going to something beyond biology so you can be sure when we do meet aliens in the future they're not going to be the greys or anything like us. That is why i think it's safe to say aliens haven't contacted us because the ones that are described aren't what they're really going to look like.

Let's consider our own future evolution. To begin with we're going start putting chips in our brains and stuff like that but forget all that, that's not really interesting what i think is interesting is is not the cybernetic enhancements but it's the fact that if you develop thinking machines as opposed to cybernetic enhancements for us then you've done something truly different - the point is the speed of improvement.

It should be obvious to you that if you can invent thinking machines, then they evolve very quickly. Not only because the fact of Moore's law, but also because they're not stuck with darwinian evolution, they could have lamarckian evolution.

If you have thinking machines then you have all sorts of advantages that in most cases trump what you can do with biology. Now the real argument is the time scale argument. The people in the AI community have been saying they're going to make a true thinking machine within 10 years, they've been saying that at least for 30 years....

Now let's say they don't do it an the next 10 years, they don't do it in the next 20 years. Suppose it takes until the end of the century or even the end of the next century - it doesn't matter. The point is you invent radio and within a century or two or three you invent your successor. That's a very shot period of time and that's why i think you can forget that ET's going to be some sort of biological entity, like a little grey guy with big eyes...they'll be machines.
edit on 18-4-2011 by andre18 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18

Originally posted by KrypticCriminal
Yes, but your basing your facts on current scientific knowlege. In the fourties a scientist made calculations on what it would take to get to the moon with full equations and everything. The answer that he came up with was it was impossible because it would take so much fuel that the rocket would'nt get off the ground. Yet come the sixties what did we do.


The aliens could be millions of years ahead using technology very far ahead of us but it doesn't matter how for a head they they might be, millions, billions it does't matter. Any aliens 2-300 years ahead of us are already going to something beyond biology so you can be sure when we do meet aliens in the future they're not going to be the greys or anything like us. That is why i think it's safe to say aliens haven't contacted us because the ones that are described aren't what they're really going to look like.

Let's consider our own future evolution. To begin with we're going start putting chips in our brains and stuff like that but forget all that, that's not really interesting what i think is interesting is is not the cybernetic enhancements but it's the fact that if you develop thinking machines as opposed to cybernetic enhancements for us then you've done something truly different - the point is the speed of improvement.

It should be obvious to you that if you can invent thinking machines, then they evolve very quickly. Not only because the fact of Moore's law, but also because they're not stuck with darwinian evolution, they could have lamarckian evolution.

If you have thinking machines then you have all sorts of advantages that in most cases trump what you can do with biology. Now the real argument is the time scale argument. The people in the AI community have been saying they're going to make a true thinking machine within 10 years, they've been saying that at least for 30 years....

Now let's say they don't do it an the next 10 years, they don't do it in the next 20 years. Suppose it takes until the end of the century or even the end of the next century - it doesn't matter. The point is you invent radio and within a century or two or three you invent your successor. That's a very shot period of time and that's why i think you can forget that ET's going to be some sort of biological entity, like a little grey guy with big eyes...they're be machines.


Once again your basing your argument on too many assumptions. How do you know how an alien species might evolve. You are right though they may not look anything like us, but when you consider what makes our species so succesful. Like oposable thumbs for example. Then you could say that aliens would have to have some kind of hands. They wont be able to build things if they havent got the limbs to pick objects up, and manipulate them. So by design they may well have something similar to our hands, because thats a perfect natural sollution. Which Evolution has came up with. So while i cant possibly say what an alien will look like. I can guess using things here on Earth. Now as for greys. Like you i can only go off what people have told me. People who claim to have come in to contact with them. Personaly i only deal with things that have some kind of hard evidence, like UFO's. So what they look like is'nt an issue and cant be considered when dealing with the argument of whether they've contacted us. You dont need to see something to know its made contact.

Now, i find the aliens being some kind of AI theory kind of interesting and your not the first to bring it to my attention. Aliens may well be machines or bio mechanical hybrids. This is a completley different issue to whether aliens have made contact with us. Although all the arguments ive put forward during this thread. Could very well have been carried out by machines or hybrids. That does'nt change anything.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by KrypticCriminal

Once again your basing your argument on too many assumptions. How do you know how an alien species might evolve.


I don't but it's easy to assume building computers means you're intelligent and that's enough to support my case. If they can't build computers then they're not going be able to visit us, so it's either one way or the other. They build computers and then after 200 years they've changed their bodies or they don't build computers and they never visit us.


You are right though they may not look anything like us, but when you consider what makes our species so succesful. Like oposable thumbs for example. Then you could say that aliens would have to have some kind of hands.


I would't go that far since koalas, possums and pandas do as well.


Personally i only deal with things that have some kind of hard evidence, like UFO's.


I'm not sure what your definition of hard evidence is because if there was anything to it, scientists wouldn't be debunking it.


So what they look like is'nt an issue and cant be considered when dealing with the argument of whether they've contacted us. You dont need to see something to know its made contact.


I agree completely apart from the fact there already are claims of contact from beings that are simply projections of what we think we are going to become - very anthropomorphic.


Now, i find the aliens being some kind of AI theory kind of interesting and your not the first to bring it to my attention. Aliens may well be machines or bio mechanical hybrids. This is a completley different issue to whether aliens have made contact with us. Although all the arguments ive put forward during this thread. Could very well have been carried out by machines or hybrids. That does'nt change anything.


It changes alien descriptions of greys reptilians and pleiadians as irrational.
edit on 18-4-2011 by andre18 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18

The aliens could be millions of years ahead using technology very far ahead of us but it doesn't matter how for a head they they might be, millions, billions it does't matter. Any aliens 2-300 years ahead of us are already going to something beyond biology so you can be sure when we do meet aliens in the future they're not going to be the greys or anything like us. That is why i think it's safe to say aliens haven't contacted us because the ones that are described aren't what they're really going to look like.


The problem with this is that it is just an assumption. Who is to say that these greys aren't machines with a fleshy "shell" for appearance's sake. Or the shell just might appear biological, but it is in fact not. I might also add that the idea of a singularity and merging with machines to this extent is entirely theoretical at this point. There's no guarantee that this will happen or if it's even possible. Many respected scientists scoff at the idea, so you have to consider this too.

Just to be clear, I don't believe in greys. There is no hard evidence for alien visitors (but there is a decent amount of evidence for UFOs, some of which might possibly be extraterrestrial in nature), but I did have to point out the flaw in your argument.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by andre18
 





I don't but it's easy to assume building computers means you're intelligent and that's enough to support my case. If they can't build computers then they're not going be able to visit us, so it's either one way or the other. They build computers and then after 200 years they've changed their bodies or they don't build computers and they never visit us.


Now your confusing issues. This thread "Aliens have not contacted us, therefore theres nothing to disclose" is dealing with contact. Not whether Intelligent aliens built computers and visited us or not. You assume that if aliens want to visit us then they must be intelligent. Your right. But what does it have to do with whether they've contacted us or not, or intelligently chose not to, or have in ways that scientists refuse to acknowlege because it goes against everything they think they know.




I would't go that far since koalas, possums and pandas do as well.


What point are you trying to make here? Aliens could'nt possibly have hands that are similar to ours? You've just given three examples of creatures that do.




I'm not sure what your definition of hard evidence is because if there was anything to it, scientists wouldn't be debunking it.


That depends on what you mean by debunking. Giving an alternative theory is'nt debunking. Im yet to hear a solid argument from a scientist as to what some UFO cases are. Then theres crop circles which have plenty of scientific evidence surrounding them yet. Scientists refuse to take them seriously. Why? If theres a perfectly natural explanation then show us. Then theres landing sites where soil samples show strange anomalies. Yet scientists wont accept that theres anything starnge going on because again it challenges what they think they already know. Being a professor does'nt automaticly make you an expert on everything. Yet everybody hangs on their every word. There just as fallable as the next man, and the fact that they've devoted so much time to convetional science can make them very narrow minded about certain things.




I agree completely apart from the fact there already are claims of contact from beings that are simply projections of what we think we are going to become - very anthropomorphic.


Like ive already said. Im still undecided on the abduction and contact phenomenons. Probably because i havent done enough research to arrive at any kind of conclusion. All we can go off are peoples claims. If those claims describe aliens that are anthropomorphic in nature. then you just have to accept that thats what they saw, or think they saw. Untill you can disprove them completely. This is one field that has actualy been scientificly tested and where there have been some great theories put forward like sleep paralysis, which you've already brought up. It does'nt explain everything. Like the Betty Hill star map for example.

For me personaly its not too much of a stretch to imagine aliens that are humanoid in design. Because like i said before the human frame deals with a lot of the challenges a species needs to overcome in order to thrive. If an alien planet is vaguley similar to ours then why could'nt a species have evolved in a similar way?




It changes alien descriptions of greys reptilians and pleiadians as irrational.


These descriptions are no more irrational than AI or bio mechanical theorys. Just because your theorys make more sense to you. It does'nt make them fact.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by GeeGee

Just to be clear, I don't believe in greys. There is no hard evidence for alien visitors (but there is a decent amount of evidence for UFOs, some of which might possibly be extraterrestrial in nature), but I did have to point out the flaw in your argument.


What flaw i don't see the flaw.....

Here's your argument - aliens crashed here in 47, the government of America kept it a secret. They're flying around the skies abducting people which is the reason for the blurry pictures of flying objects that can't be identified.

Poor argument. week, fragile, extremely delicate......

1, the thought to be alien craft at Roswell was a balloon, it was covered up because the project was tech to spy on the chance of nuclear testing
en.wikipedia.org...


Project Mogul was a top secret project by the US Army Air Forces involving microphones flown on high altitude balloons, whose primary purpose was long-distance detection of sound waves generated by Soviet atomic bomb tests. The project was carried out from 1947 until early 1949. The project was moderately successful, but was very expensive and was superseded by a network of seismic detectors and air sampling for fallout which were cheaper, more reliable, and easier to deploy and operate.


2, America isn't hiding anything because the alien craft that crashed here were balloons.

3, the pictures of flying objects that can't be identified are flying objects that can't be identified.
Your logic - flying objects that can't be identified = aliens...?????
edit on 18-4-2011 by andre18 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by andre18
 

Here are 5 NASA Astronauts that say you are wrong. Now how do you think I am going to believe. Not you.

*New* Released Documentary for Disclosure.




posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by coolottie
 


What evidence do they have that no one else does? Can they demonstrate that aliens are here? Astronaughts are respected for their achievements and how they've served scientists but the few that say aliens are here definitely are not scientists. It's not fact just because a figure of authority says so - it is if the figure can demonstrate it.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by andre18

What flaw i don't see the flaw.....

Here's your argument - aliens crashed here in 47, the government of America kept it a secret. They're flying around the skies abducting people which is the reason for the blurry pictures of flying objects that can't be identified.


Firstly, I didn't say that at all. I don't believe an alien craft crashed at Roswell. There's no hard evidence that aliens crashed there. I don't even know where you got that from.

I was talking about your argument that the alleged greys look a certain way contrary to our forecasts of future technology that enables individuals to transcend biology. I'm simply pointing out that it is incorrect in assuming that an alien race is biological simply because they appear to be. It may just be that they look biological, but are actually mechanical or heavily augmented. We wouldn't know unless we had one on an examination table.




3, the pictures of flying objects that can't be identified are flying objects that can't be identified.
Your logic - flying objects that can't be identified = aliens...?????
edit on 18-4-2011 by andre18 because: (no reason given)


I understand that distinction. If you noticed, I italicized "possibly," meaning that it is a possibility for truly anomalous cases, although it may not necessarily be the most probable one. I didn't claim UFOs are aliens. You're the one that came to that (erroneous) conclusion



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Remember you need proof for and against.

ALS



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by andre18

Originally posted by KrypticCriminal
Yes, but your basing your facts on current scientific knowlege. In the fourties a scientist made calculations on what it would take to get to the moon with full equations and everything. The answer that he came up with was it was impossible because it would take so much fuel that the rocket would'nt get off the ground. Yet come the sixties what did we do.


The aliens could be millions of years ahead using technology very far ahead of us but it doesn't matter how for a head they they might be, millions, billions it does't matter. Any aliens 2-300 years ahead of us are already going to something beyond biology so you can be sure when we do meet aliens in the future they're not going to be the greys or anything like us. That is why i think it's safe to say aliens haven't contacted us because the ones that are described aren't what they're really going to look like.

Let's consider our own future evolution. To begin with we're going start putting chips in our brains and stuff like that but forget all that, that's not really interesting what i think is interesting is is not the cybernetic enhancements but it's the fact that if you develop thinking machines as opposed to cybernetic enhancements for us then you've done something truly different - the point is the speed of improvement.

It should be obvious to you that if you can invent thinking machines, then they evolve very quickly. Not only because the fact of Moore's law, but also because they're not stuck with darwinian evolution, they could have lamarckian evolution.

If you have thinking machines then you have all sorts of advantages that in most cases trump what you can do with biology. Now the real argument is the time scale argument. The people in the AI community have been saying they're going to make a true thinking machine within 10 years, they've been saying that at least for 30 years....

Now let's say they don't do it an the next 10 years, they don't do it in the next 20 years. Suppose it takes until the end of the century or even the end of the next century - it doesn't matter. The point is you invent radio and within a century or two or three you invent your successor. That's a very shot period of time and that's why i think you can forget that ET's going to be some sort of biological entity, like a little grey guy with big eyes...they'll be machines.
edit on 18-4-2011 by andre18 because: (no reason given)


Sorry i missed this one.

OK lets say aliens do decide to go down this route.

What does this change when it comes to Aliens making contact with us?

What aliens might do with technology and how they may evolve has nothing to do with your original post. So if you want to disguss this in detail you should start a new thread. Your only derailing this one.

I



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   
i feel sorry for the 21 people who flag this thread



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by sam_inc
i feel sorry for the 21 people who flag this thread


Maybe we need to suggest that there be some accountability around here.
I think it should show in your stats along with your avatar when you post in a thread that you flagged.
That way they can "Deny Ignorance" in the face of proof.

I Is Not IgNoRANT.

I tried early on in this thread to talk sense into the OP.
Now I see that others have been drug into this nonsense.



edit on 18-4-2011 by LazyGuy because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2011 by LazyGuy because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
30
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join